Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Lagardien and Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (2025/432) [2025] ZAGPJHC 20 (21 January 2025)
The court found the visa dispute moot after the applicants left South Africa. It discharged the interim interdict and ordered each party to pay its own costs.
R.K v I.K (Sanction) (17760/2019) [2024] ZAWCHC 307 (25 September 2024)
The court sentenced the respondent to 30 days’ correctional supervision, with house arrest and reporting conditions, after finding imprisonment inappropriate.
Copiso v Minister Correctional Services and Others (5364/2023) [2024] ZAFSHC 214 (18 July 2024)
The High Court dismissed a Rule 30 application to set aside particulars of claim as an irregular step, finding the defendants’ notice was late and procedurally defective.
National Director of Public Prosecutions v Mlamuleli (A22/2022) [2024] ZAFSHC 46; 2024 (1) SACR 435 (FB) (14 February 2024)
The court held that the High Court may rescind a restraint order granted under section 26(1) of POCA on recognised common law grounds, provided those grounds existed at the time the order was made. Section 26(10) of POCA also permits rescission on specified statutory grounds arising after the order. The respondent's attorneys were present in court but unaware of proceedings in chambers, resulting in default not attributable to wilful neglect. The respondent presented a bona fide defence with prospects of success, namely that she did not receive any benefit from the alleged offences. The court…
Source excerpt
Commissioner of the South African Revenue Service v Phakati and Others (2406/2021) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1958 (24 November 2023)
The High Court struck off a reserved-costs application as moot after an ex parte tax preservation order had already been discharged by agreement.
Shannin and Ulisha Investments (Pty) Limited t/a Fast Spares v Mahomed and Another (16524/2022P) [2023] ZAKZPHC 135 (16 November 2023)
In an urgent spoliation matter, the High Court discharged the rule nisi and, on costs only, ordered each party to pay its own costs.
Momentum Group Limited v Moothsamy [2023] ZAGPPHC 507; 56511/2012 (5 July 2023)
The court allowed an amendment to a plea in a life-policy dispute, holding the changes clarified existing denials and did not amount to bad-faith delay.
Feni v Pan South African Language Board (JS 629/2016) [2023] ZALCJHB 145 (15 May 2023)
The Labour Court held that an order requiring amendment of a statement of claim was suspended pending appeal and petition, so the claim was not dismissed by operation of law.
South African Municipal Workers Union obo Khalamashe and Others v City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality and Another (J412/2021) [2023] ZALCJHB 120 (3 May 2023)
The court held that the rule nisi granted on 4 June 2021 lapsed when the matter was removed from the roll on 5 November 2021 without extension to a specific date. As a result, the applicants could not obtain relief for contempt of court at this stage. The proper procedure would have been to apply for revival of the rule nisi under rule 27(4) of the Uniform Rules of Court, which was not done. The court found that, while the applicants had merit in their underlying claim, the absence of a valid rule nisi precluded a finding of contempt. The other preliminary points raised by the respondents wer…
Source excerpt
Hull v Free Market Foundation (Southern Africa) and Others (2021/39680) [2023] ZAGPJHC 103 (8 February 2023)
The court exercised its unfettered discretion regarding costs, noting that the main application and related interlocutory applications became moot following the election of a new Board. The Foundation's conduct after the matter became moot, including filing unnecessary affidavits, seeking commercial court certification, and persisting with litigation, was unjustified and increased costs unnecessarily. Hull's proposal that each party bear its own costs was reasonable. The Foundation's application for costs was dismissed, and it was ordered to pay the costs of the costs application, including t…
Source excerpt
Explore more
